r/comics • u/TommySiegel • 20d ago

OC Star Wars vs Star Trek: a helpful guide [OC]

Post image

Star Trek 2009? Fun! The Force Awakens? Fun! And yet…

27.0k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

216

u/Made_Bail 20d ago

Heyy, I liked the JJ Abrams Trek movies. Well, the first two. #3 was forgettable. But I definitely don't think he ruined Trek.

I know Star Wars is overall more popular than Trek, but the amount of GOOD Trek vs the amount of good SW is vastly weighted toward Trek in my opinion. I haven't liked any new Star Wars stuff aside from Rogue One/Andor. The prequel trilogy are objectively bad movies.

Trek > SW

99

u/innocent_blue 20d ago edited 20d ago

Just re-watched the first JJ Trek and it’s honestly fun, and I think it stands up. I think Into Darkness is good trek too and an interesting twist on Kahn in the alternate universe.

17

u/AnonAwaaaaay 20d ago

They were also super well written. A lot of person X dors thing and then the consequences splinter and now everyone has to deal with it. 

I can see why old school fans didn't like that it was a basic action movie rather than an intellectual Star Trek movie, but it's weird how offended they get. 

4

u/spudmarsupial 20d ago

I think it's because there are a lot of action B-movies and wasn't much higher minded scifi at the time. Once a show goes action it seldom comes back (I'd say Acolyte, Obi-Wan, and Andor prove that Star Wars can manage it, and Lower Decks does a bit with Trek).

3

u/Justaticklerone 20d ago

As an old school fan myself, the losers that crap all over Kelvin Timeline and Disco/Picard/Academy/SNW, are the reason why Trek is in danger of 60 being the last milestone. The only series that doesn't catch vitriol is Lower Decks.

1

u/AnonAwaaaaay 20d ago

I fully agree. 

It usually always comes down to them having a fear of change. That's every reasoning I've been given so far is shit like the Klingon in Academy disrespects all Klingdon's by being a Pacifist and that there's never been any other (ignoring the fact that it thematically fits because the Klingons are a "Kill first, Never ask questions." race and that any other pacifists would have been murdered like this one almost was. It really feels like he was only let go because his parents already lost his brother. 

I really enjoy the changes.

2

u/Same-Suggestion-1936 20d ago

Honestly its weird to me people are such Star Wars purists. Almost every instance of them hating on something the new ones did you can find an example of the exact same thing in episodes 4-6. Like good movies but they are not terribly well written and it was something Star Wars fans used to mock the movies and themselves for liking the movies anyway, then suddenly they made new ones and people decided the lovable absolute schlock that is the first three movies is somehow perfect now.

We never thought it was perfect, we had every bad line of dialogue memorized and constantly made fun of them. George Lucas is a bad writer with good ideas

1

u/xiaorobear 20d ago

I just can't agree, Into Darkness is really bad. I couldn't believe that the climax of the movie was, "No, we can't kill Khan, we need a sample of his augment blood to save Kirk! Ignore the other 75 augments we already have sedated right here on the ship already and get in a fist fight with him!"

5

u/AnonAwaaaaay 20d ago

The other augments were still in cryosleep and they had the line about how difficult it would be to pull them out. Reasonably, any blood they attempt to get out of them is probably gonna have problems or take time to become usable for Kirk, which they needed right then. Khan was a viable sample.

1

u/LongJohnSelenium 20d ago

Eh... There is no reality the rest of the officers of the enterprise would have let a cadet take command.

Movie should have skipped to Kirk being Lt Cdr, defacto banned from the fleet for being a fuck up and teaching some unimportant throwaway elective at the academy in a career going nowhere.

Could still do most of the exact same plot beats, the same irreverence to command, cheating at the test, etc, just don't let a cadet be the captain.

2

u/AnonAwaaaaay 20d ago

/All cadets/ were mobilized for the defense of Vulcan. Many of the other people around were in the same position just without his issues with the Kobayashi Maru that not everyone knew about, he was still qualified because he passed the Captain's Track, and turned into a Second Officer by Captain Pike who believed in him. Them not following him as the appropriate Captain as decided by Pike would be a form of Mutiny. They trust Pike so they trust Kirk.

25

u/Made_Bail 20d ago

Totally agree. They were fun movies.

11

u/airfryerfuntime 20d ago edited 20d ago

Into Darkness was stupid as hell for multiple reasons.

For starters, they still did the classic 'I am Kahn' reveal, but it wouldn't have meant anything since they didn't know who he was by that point, lol.

Then the whole thing with the USS Vengeance being faster than the Enterprise is ridiculous, as well, because the only way that would have been possible is if the Vulcans gave them the tech, which wouldn't have happened since it was a warship.

The entire movie is one big plot hole.

4

u/ThePrussianGrippe 20d ago

The evil plot of 2009 Trek also makes absolutely zero sense, and violates causality. Sci-Fi writers are infamous for being bad at scale/distance, and JJ may actually just be the flat out worst at it. See destruction of Hosnia Prime for follow up evidence.

2

u/SirBiscuit 20d ago

I truly despise Into Darkness. It is a stupid action movie, with a resolution and overall message that is absolutely the opposite of what Trek is all about. Seriously, it end with "violence is the real best answer, so to save your friend you'll need to hunt down, best up, and steal the blood of your enemy!" Ugh.

3

u/AtrumRuina 20d ago

I really liked Beyond, more than Into Darkness personally. It felt like an extended Trek episode, which I enjoyed a ton. The first movie is really good but not great.

7

u/Zanoushe 20d ago

same I loved the JJ Trek movies.

2

u/ExpeditionZero 20d ago

The first 15 mins or so were amazing. Granted, it was a rather flashy battle scene but it was done so well with great attention to detail and building on modern weapons such as the multiple defensive gun turrets.

After that it just went downhill for me, Kirk was an asshole, though Bones was great. I would sum it up as everything but the script was amazing but the script ruined so much. I guess much of that was due to the copyright issues?

1

u/Chubbstock 20d ago

First JJ Trek had the strongest hook in the opening that I've ever seen on a movie. After that entire scene with the Kelvin and the mining ship and the romulans, and Kirk's birth, my god I'm absolutely riveted to my seat.

1

u/beatrailblazer 20d ago

the problem with the JJ Trek movies is not that theyre bad, its that theyre not really Star Trek. They're generic scifi movies with Star Trek characters

1

u/Tremodian 20d ago

They were fun sci-fi action movies. They just were not Star Trek.

1

u/Agreeable_Reaction11 19d ago

The First Minute of Star trek 2009 Was peak. The Moment when the Calvin appears, the Radio chatter in the background and the typical Star trek ping sounds

0

u/Ferrymansobol 20d ago

They are not trek in spirit.

The start of first one by JJ is about as far from Trek as you can get. Don't get me started on the Flanderisation of Star Fleet.

0

u/Wuz314159 20d ago

They made a freshman in school captain of a starship.

0

u/Jensaarai 20d ago

I think Into Darkness is good trek

It is not.

55

u/TommySiegel 20d ago edited 20d ago

While I agree in a vacuum (Star Trek 2009 was fun!), the success of that movie led to execs trying to make it an action franchise and stumbling around in the dark for the last decade making an endless amount of new Trek that just doesn’t really tonally work.

(I should add that some of it DOES work and is fun - looking at you Strange New Worlds season 1 and 2 - but when I zoom out it’s just an era that just isn’t really… uh… working…)

12

u/Made_Bail 20d ago

Eh, I agree about some of the new Trek. But I love Lower Decks, and Strange New Worlds had been great up until this bizarre new season.

6

u/Hard_To_Port 20d ago

SNW is missing some of the grit and depth of earlier Trek. It feels so safe and sanitized. While it is a standout of the newer Trek series, that's a low bar to clear. Lower Decks is great too, but it is hampered by adult animation tropes (everyone must be insufferable and obnoxious) and the shorter format. 

1

u/twisty125 20d ago

I love so much about Lower Decks and suggest it to everyone I can - but have to preface that "they came off the Rick and Morty wacky and annoying main character syndrome for a bit. They chill out, just bear through it because it's so much better than what it seems".

Ultimately what won me over to watching it in the first place after being skeptical was the clip of Shaxx finally getting to Eject the Warp Core, "please can I eject it, I have been VERY GOOD this month", and everyone's cheering as he heads down to engineering.

3

u/AnonAwaaaaay 20d ago

Lower Decks and Starfleet Academy are definitely my favorites. It's great to see things so far out of how the standard Captain-based stories go!

2

u/Buckwheat469 20d ago

LD, SNW, and SFA are great. Discovery had a tough time with me because it was too much drama and not enough character. While I do think that SNW is campy, the high Spock episode was hilarious, especially when he mind melded with a plant and started seeing them.

14

u/jeremy1015 20d ago edited 20d ago

And yet, the Orville, which is, basically so, much Star Trek, that, I still don’t, understand how, they haven’t, been sued, has se,x and action, and jokes, and it’s, just better, Trek than, any Trek, that’s been, made lately.

43

u/EunuchNinja 20d ago

What did punctuation do to you?

18

u/jeremy1015 20d ago

Went back and added some commas just for you buddy

16

u/framistan12 20d ago

Now, it reads, like Shatner.

2

u/AnonAwaaaaay 20d ago

The Orville Parodies Star Trek and Parody is one of the few things that allows someone to bypass Copyright Laws. 

2

u/Red_Dox 20d ago

...and it’s, just better, Trek than, any Trek, that’s been, made lately.

While I agree that the newer Trek is vastly not worth it, I break a lance for "Lower Decks". That was some good Trek.

1

u/[deleted] 20d ago

[deleted]

2

u/jeremy1015 20d ago

See, the, other, comment

1

u/A-Wings-are-Neat 20d ago

As time passes, I think the lack of an Orville S4 has more to do with “hey we need to avoid getting sued” and less Seth McFarlane’s busy career.

0

u/EducationalWin7496 20d ago

People always say this, but the Orville is missing the essential element to making good Trek, which is serious ethical and moral analysis... The show is devoid of any serious dissection of society, philosophy, or anything of the sort on any meaningful level. At best, it attempts to mimic the motions of this, but because it doesn't offer any critiques or analysis on any important contemporary subjects, I just can't call it "good trek". I get that it's a joke, but on the few times they did try to address moral dilemmas, they didn't bother to feign either comedy or commentary. Almost every episode of TNG, TOS, and even DS9, grappled with something essential to the human condition, society, or morality. The best way to describe the show is a series of morality plays, and all new trek, including the Orville, lacks that essential element, which is why trek hasn't felt like trek since Enterprise, which was also very weak in morality, although not entirely absent like contemporary trek. Can you imagine a speech about equality and fairness in discovery or snw? Let alone an entire episode dedicated to a specific facet of such a topic? Even if you can, you have to admit it's a minority at best. The missing element from modern trek is a serious moral backbone. Like it or not, Roddenberry's left wing politics and ethics were an essential element that drove both story, setting, and characters, and when we lost that influence, we lost what made star trek so different from everything else on TV. No amount of Harvard writers churning out the same tired formulas can replace someone with a real perspective and something important to say.

2

u/jeremy1015 20d ago

You have to be joking right? The entire storyline with the gender confirmation story with Bortus and the painful ramifications that follow put the lie to that immediately and that's early on on the show.

0

u/EducationalWin7496 20d ago

Maybe if your idea of social commentary is barely coherent drivel, sure. It's like comparing a doctoral thesis to an eli5 post on reddit. The episode you reference is not only ham fisted and devoid of nuance, but it's so ignorant in its presentation that it borders on offensive. Which is the criticism I was referencing initially. Its attempts are a gross facsimile, a barely feigned attempt to resemble a Stark Trek episode, with nothing on the topic that they actually wanted to say. The goal was to play pretend at making Star Trek. In the same way two kids bashing their toys together are trying to imitate a battle. It's, at best, a sign that the writers recognised an essential element of their inspiration, but they either lacked the care, or the ability, to execute anything reasonably equivalent in quality. Again, it screams that the writers didn't actually care about the topic, but merely about making something that addressed a topic. Like it was a box to check on their list of things that Star Trek did. IMO, this is what makes the Orville such a poor imitation. It doesn't really care about anything other than Star Trek. It's the same reason that the JJ Abrams SW is so terrible. It's nostalgia bait. The people who made the originals cared about something, and from that care came something new and wonderful. JJ Abrams cared about star wars, and from that care came something that resembled star wars. But without that essential essence, it is just a grotesque impression. Everyone hated it, and it's because it was devoid of anything to say beyond, "hey, wasn't star wars cool? Do you remember Chewbacca? What about lightsabers? Wasn't Palpatine cool?". Similarly, the Orville is just, "hey, wasn't it great when the crew had their preconceptions challenged? Wasn't it great to see all the strange aliens and their cultures?". It's not a show that seeks to explore our own peculiarities in the bizarre extremes of fantasy. It's a show that seeks to recreate an aesthetic. And it excuses its failure to meaningfully achieve this with the guise of parody.

1

u/vthemechanicv 20d ago

success of that movie led to execs trying to make it an action franchise

I would argue this happened years before with the TNG movies. They wanted to recreate the success Wrath of Khan, without understanding why it worked. I don't think Star Trek 2009 would exist without Nemesis.

1

u/mmariner 20d ago

It led to renewed interest, which Trek desperately needed at the time.

How many shows have there been since JJ's movies? 5? 6? Some bad, some good! Seems like unlike star wars, people are more accepting of new concepts and don't need as many "'member-berries" as Star Wars

1

u/techleopard 19d ago

I was a fan of Picard. It did have some harsh pacing but as a recent Trek installment, it was better than .. that other one.

I just wish Trek would go back to its roots.

Give me low budget sets and no name actors, and let's get back to the OG timeline and quit trying to rewrite the franchise.

If we're just tired of the same old song and dance of following a Federation starship, let's go back to a premise like DS9. Or get freaky, let's follow a Klingon ship or something. Just do something besidrs lens-flare action-drama that costs so much per episode that you can't actually plan more than a season at a time.

16

u/PlagueOfGripes 20d ago

It was more like the remaining heads wanted to ruin Trek but didn't have the means till Abrams wanted it to be an action film. Which is what the actors had wanted to do all that time.

So more of an enabling ruination than a direct one.

12

u/jeremy1015 20d ago

I am a huge, huge Trek fan but if there is one legitimate criticism it’s that everyone seems sterilized. The Orville and the Abram’s Trek movies and Lower Decks are good influences on a series that has at times felt like a bad parody of itself for a long time.

Same thing Austin Powers did for Bond.

4

u/The3rdBert 20d ago

Almost all of the TNG movies are action movies in the same vein.

2

u/Sweet_Muffin1 20d ago

Yeah, that's his point. The actors had a large influence on the scripts, which is why many of them degraded in quality. For example the stupid dune buggy scenes in Nemesis was due to Patrick Stewart.

1

u/ShrimpShrimpington 19d ago

Wait is that true? Why did he want that?

1

u/Sweet_Muffin1 19d ago

Because he likes dune buggies, that's literally the only reason.

1

u/PlagueOfGripes 20d ago

Correct. They *really* wanted to be action movie stars in an IP that isn't about those things, so that's what they made.

1

u/ApprehensiveSoup2214 20d ago

And Star Trek movies in general suck when compared to the shows.

1

u/Mudcat-69 19d ago

Yeah you get some real good gems like Undiscovered Country and then stinkers like every movie after that.

Some of them could have even been good if they had different premises too.

Take First Contact for example. Take out the Borg, the crew of the Enterprise, anything remotely resembling time travel, film it like a historical documentary about first contact with the Vulcans and wham! An actually decent idea for a made for TV movie.

1

u/ElGosso 20d ago

The movie that most successfully captures Trek's vibe is Master and Commander tbh

15

u/SigismundsChair 20d ago

The first Abrams movie isn’t really bad… but man does Abrams suck at worldbuilding and scale. He gave SW the same treatment. Made both settings as wide and deep as a puddle. 

16

u/blondebuilder 20d ago

Well said. He’s really good at hype and creating a popcorn experience, but it’s all very surfacy.

He did the same with Lost. That show was gripping with all the mysteries, visuals, and action. Every episode hyped the next one with more questions. Everyone was waiting for a big explanation, but then it had the laziest ending ever. I felt robbed.

9

u/S_A_R_K 20d ago

He should make movie trailers, that's it

2

u/FauxReal 20d ago

The writers fucked that up too. My friend worked on the show and said nobody knew WTF was going on.

5

u/S_A_R_K 20d ago

JJ Abrams should be hired to make trailers for movies that don't exist yet. The final scene of TFA with Rey handing Luke the lightsaber on Ach-To is an absolutely perfect trailer for a competently written trilogy.

5

u/seguardon 20d ago

It's not bad but good lord is it dumb. Red matter makes black holes, sure, I can get on board with that. Spock detonated one inside Saturn's orbital radius. Even a third grader would ask "Wouldn't that be bad for the Earth?"

And he brought that same lack of knowledge into Star Wars where the speed of light is slow enough to allow a shot across a galaxy to be visible in real time from an unrelated planet. Also he had to retcon hyperspace engines onto a planet because a superweapon that can only fire two shots before it's completely worthless is bad. (Also it completed its objective with the first shot, the second is a pointless victory lap, which makes the climax of the film stupid on a writing level. JJ only knows how to accomplish the feel of story beats, but never bothers to construct the framework that holds them up. See: every major plot beat from TRoS.)

I could write a book about every way JJ's writing style has ended with hollow plot points that made his movies crumble before the test of time. Even by popcorn movie standards, he's a hack. Say what you will about Michael Bay's movies (and I do), but The Rock is pretty damned rewatchable.

1

u/csaliture 20d ago

The Rock is as good as it is almost certainly because Quentin Tarantino did the rewrites.

2

u/seguardon 20d ago

I didn't know that. All the same, we cannot undervalue the cocaine-addled casting genius who paired Cage and Connery.

3

u/buglz 20d ago

Star Wars takes place in a galaxy that has faster than light travel but they stick to a solar system consisting of a desert planet, an ice planet, a jungle planet, a city planet and 40-ish people that keep bumping into each other.  It's like when they made another ghost busters and just filled the trailer with slimer and the marshmallow man.  Expand!!!  Expanddddd!!!!

1

u/That_Elk_7964 19d ago

Literally none of those planets are in the same systems.

1

u/buglz 19d ago

I wasn't being literal

2

u/Agreeable_Reaction11 19d ago

I remember a life when Star trek was over ages ago and then JJ's First Film dropped. The First scene with the Calvin, the Radio chatter and the rugged look of the ship... I was hyper stoked. Sadly the First Minute of the Film was the pinnacle of it, but still. The feeling I got was glorious

1

u/Pompoulus 20d ago

At this point, knowing where it leads, I'd say that constitutes 'bad'. He's sneaky-bad. He knows how to set stuff up but his storytelling strategy literally does not involve planning out where the plot threads are going. Nothing he does has any real foundations, it makes for a fun first movie and it simultaneously sabotages the franchise.

1

u/AncientSith 19d ago

Definitely shouldn't have been allowed to touch either universe.

15

u/KristopheH 20d ago

How do you like the second better than the third? Beyond was a really good Star Trek story, while Into Darkness was a lame retelling of Wrath of Khan

11

u/Jashugita 20d ago

I´m with you, into the darkness is an absurd script.

4

u/twisty125 20d ago

I remember seeing Beyond in theatres and was like "oh my god, it's like I'm watching a modern TOS episode". Loved the Bones and Spock buddy action they got into in that one.

1

u/Made_Bail 20d ago

I think i have them reversed. Which is the one that starts with them on the planet trying to save the natives?

6

u/KristopheH 20d ago

Both Into Darkness and Beyond start that way...

2

u/Made_Bail 20d ago

Well shit lol

I haven't watched them in years. I bet you couldn't tell. 🤣

8

u/CarlosFer2201 20d ago

Into Darkness has Benadryl Cumbersome, Beyond has Idris Elba.

1

u/Educational-Chart187 20d ago

I think you mean Britishname Cantgetitright

12

u/Mean_Mix_99 20d ago

I love when people say "objectively" like their opinion is more valid when they label it "objective" lol

1

u/Flesroy 20d ago

idk i'm a fan of the movies myself, but there are some parts that are just really hard to defend in any way.

of course it's gonna be subjective technically, but technically someone could find pouring bleach into their eyes an enjoyable experience too.

1

u/Mean_Mix_99 20d ago

I've seen them. I don't love them. i've never rewatched them, nor do I want to. That being said, I believe it's preposterous to say art is objectively bad. There is lots of art that I don't enjoy, don't find compelling, and frankly believe looks like hot garbage. But it's art . . . there is no objectivity when it comes to art.

-2

u/keynoko 20d ago

The prequels are objectively bad

3

u/Mean_Mix_99 20d ago

I don't think you know what objectively means as it relates to opinions.

1

u/Heavy_Weapons_Guy_ 20d ago

They're either stupid or so emotional about their pop culture opinions that they have to misuse the English language to pretend that they have the only valid opinion. It's sad.

-2

u/keynoko 20d ago

Well I have three degrees and retired a couple years ago at 38 after buying my home and freedom on investment returns alone, so I guess it's the second one. Relevant is that I also speak four languages and have lived in three countries, one of which is where I met my wife courting her in my third language. Made a living for my writing in that country.

How about this: the prequels are literally objectively bad.

Only losers are those who slink to semantics to make lame points. Those losers know nothing of etymology of course. They just feel offended that I think their movies suck, which they do.

0

u/Heavy_Weapons_Guy_ 20d ago

lol

1

u/keynoko 19d ago

You got bad taste, bro. It's ok. How's that for subjective?

-1

u/Meistermagier 20d ago

Und jetzt der game was the most iconic lightsaber fights. Obi-Wan versus Anakin on Mustafa while everything is burning down around them. 

4

u/keynoko 20d ago

Some of the most vapid, masturbatory fight scenes, to be sure

2

u/Hazelarc 20d ago

Star Wars has the bonus of good books and video games. While there hasn’t been much good Star Wars movie or tv lately, there have been a ton of really good SW video games

2

u/farva_06 20d ago

He really did lean in to that lens flare, but otherwise they were pretty fun movies.

2

u/iridael 20d ago

good starwars is subjective. but...

the OG trilogy. EP 2 and 3 hold up very well. Rogue one, I enjoyed the solo film and don’t really see why people shit on it so much.

Andor both seasons, Mando season 1 & 2.

Rebels (most of), and (a selection of) clone wars, some of it is VERY strong and some is weak ass. Bad batch (same, its ok)

Star wars clone wars OG animated series is just great.

Obi-wan is similar to Solo, I liked it but i can understand that people did not.

the new Maul shadow lord too. I havent seen skeleton crew, so I cant really judge it.

but thats a lot of good content.

HAVING said that. there's a LOT more star trek and I rarely found myself disliking any of it that I watched. except that modern stuff using the mushroom ship, like the actors were ok, the initial plot was cool, but when they fucked off into the future, it should have ended then.

2

u/Hooked_on_Avionics 20d ago

Into Darkness seems anti-Trek to me. JJ Boldly went where we have already gone twice before, then included Section 31 bullshit that defeats the entire point of the Federation. It's a lazy plot.

I like the other two, though.

2

u/therealhairykrishna 20d ago

Not sure how anyone could argue with that really. There are what, 11 star wars films? Four good ones? Maybe 5? Plus some of the others are really poor.

2

u/eekamuse 20d ago

I loved them. Didn't we all when they came out?

2

u/Time_Screen_9399 19d ago

I think it's just not really comparable. It's like comparing LoTR to Harry Potter.

2

u/TetZoo 16d ago

I truly love them!

4

u/[deleted] 20d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/Obsidian_XIII 20d ago

This is Wrath of Khan erasure and I will not have it.

0

u/[deleted] 20d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/RogueBromeliad 20d ago

Benedict Cumberbatch was a better Khan than Ricardo Montalbán IMO. even though Montalbán is the most iconic one as a space barbarian, I still think that Cumberbatch sold the psychotic intellect and anger better.

BTW: Montalbán, with that silver hair, being ripped AF, no shirt and open vest... that's one hell of a look. 🥵

2

u/[deleted] 20d ago edited 19d ago

[deleted]

1

u/[deleted] 20d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] 20d ago edited 19d ago

[deleted]

1

u/derth21 20d ago

Perhaps some of the best movies in the Star Trek franchise, depending on your tastes, but not the best, "Star Trek Movies." Below 5 on that scale, even.

1

u/TheInfinityOfThought 19d ago

This is like saying St. Anger is the best Metallica album.

2

u/Meistermagier 20d ago

JJ didn't ruin Trek he made okish movies which to be fair are all Star Trek movies. 

What really ruined Star Trek was whatever Star Trek Discovery was. 

6

u/Cornelius_Wangenheim 20d ago

What ruined it was Alex Kurtzman being put in charge of it, which in turn is because JJ had him as a writer on his two movies.

1

u/CmdrThunderpunch 20d ago

The Clone Wars and Rebels animated series are pretty solid if you haven’t watched them. Plenty of good Star Wars in there, but also some just awful episodes.

1

u/_Middlefinger_ 20d ago

ST09 was sterile and generic, but not horrible, I guess. Into Darkness was horrible, like truly rancid.

1

u/FrostyD7 20d ago

Beyond is forgettable in a good way. Just felt like a really strong 2 part episode.

1

u/boringestnickname 20d ago

NuTrek isn't Trek.

Sure, the first movie isn't a bad movie, it just shouldn't be a Trek movie.

If you look at everything ST after the Abrams movies, it's pretty obvious that he did, in fact, ruin Trek.

1

u/nbunkerpunk 20d ago

Honestly, I feel like the JJTrek movie #3 was a better TOS movie than the first two by a lot. The first two are scifi action/adventure movies. Remove Star Trek out of those movies and it doesn't change much, imo.

1

u/techleopard 19d ago

I always felt like Star Trek shone best as a slow burn, low/medium budget space romp. You watch Star Trek every evening after work because it was relaxing and it made you feel good. Enough action to keep you interested, but always will a satisfying conclusion.

Star Wars was the higher budget fantastical epic-in-space. It's exciting and fun but it's also critical, exhausting, and depressing at times. You watch it to talk to you buddies about, not because it's relaxing.

1

u/j3ffro15 19d ago

Yea dude 2009 was a super cool remake that respected the original in a way that I thought was really neat. Like yea it’s a reboot BUT it’s a reboot that incorporates the original in a way that no other ip (that I know of) has done which was cool.

Full agree the 3rd movie was super mid though.

1

u/gaydognova 20d ago

Didn't know the cool artist lady was a trekkie

1

u/_kaidu_ 20d ago

I agree that the first two movies were good, but I still don't like JJ Abrams. His style of film making is: remake a franchise, ignore what the franchise is about, instead make it shiny and boring for the general audience and please the fans by adding some stupid easter eggs.

In Star Trek the movies were still okay, in Star Wars it was a disaster.

1

u/Scot-Rahul 20d ago

I disagree! But only on the prequel movies bit. Everything else is fine.

Phantom Menace is…okay. It’s pretty slow, has the introduction to Jar Jar Binks (ugh) and feels like a lot of lore dumping to explain where the galaxy is now in the past. However! The pod racing scene is pretty fun, it’s a great origin story for Anakin, and the last 20 minutes are exciting with the Maul fight (plus that gave us Duel of the Fates, a truly fantastic piece of music)

Attack of the Clones is HALF of a good movie. The Obi-Wan half, specifically. Practically everything with Anakin and Leia is either boring or cringy, but I found Obi-WN eventually figuring it all out enjoyable.

Revenge of the Sith is just a good movie overall. Despite knowing how it goes it makes Anakin’s downfall feel so tragic, and sets up everything we see in A New Hope quite well.

0

u/vi_sucks 20d ago

I think the difference comes when you consider the expanded universe, especially the novels.

Star Wars has some really good novels and an overall more considered world building explored in those novels. Nobody reads Star Trek novels.

This was important back in the 90s when the prequels didn't exist yet. And that's when most fans who still care about Wars v Trek formed their opinion on the subject.

1

u/Made_Bail 20d ago

Good point.

Speaking of, Trek has some amazing novels, too. I cannot remember what's its called, but the one with Q and Trelaine was incredible.